There *are* actively managed ETFs as well.
There are also passive index mutual funds too.ace604 wrote: ↑ There *are* actively managed ETFs as well.
e.g. https://www.vanguardcanada.ca/individua ... r-etfs.htm
"Vanguard may be best known for indexing, but we've managed active investments since our founding in 1975. Today we're one of the world's largest active managers, with more than $1 trillion in active funds under management."
Yes, but Cavgirl already knew that:
Also, if you measure by assets under management, "mostly" might change
)Yes we all know and agree on a lot of those things. There are benefits of the pooled funds that have 0 or very low MER.ace604 wrote: ↑ Yes, but Cavgirl already knew that:
Also, if you measure by assets under management, "mostly" might change
Sure there are more unique active mutual funds then passive ... but where is more money invested?
Anyways, my only point was that:
"ETFs are passive, following indices."
... is not correct.
Fees are typically higher for active yes (vs passive ETF).
Active ETF fee > Passive ETF fee
Active MF fee > Passive MF fee
(certainly within same fund company anyways, but possibly not across companies if you have a really low-fee active ETF like Vanguard it might be cheaper than some other company high-fee rip-off passive fees
If you want active though, there *are* active ETFs, and as illustrated by my Vanguard link, they can be fairly low-fee ... so you can save on active fees with an active ETF vs many higher-fee active mutual funds.
It of course depends on what investment strategy or fund manager you want to choose.
Anyways. Points:
1) active ETFs exist.
2) fees on active ETFs can be lower than MF
It's not. Read again. BTW the 2nd reply talked about getting lubed. Nobody else talked about what the minimum investment is $100k.superfresh89 wrote: ↑ The criteria is usually a minimum investment of $100K, plus there is an annual fee of 1-2%. This was already answered in the first two replies.
The TD Private Invest Counsel, or Private Invest Advisor, all have access to stocks, bonds, ETFs, etc.superfresh89 wrote: ↑ With a $1MM portfolio, you're better off using a fee-based advisor like Wood Gundy. The fees would be similar (~1% annually), but you'd have access to stocks, bonds and ETFs rather than only mutual funds.
CIBC/Woody Gundy does not have private banking. Other banks are bigger and doing better, and would argue they have better investment management and wealth advisors.superfresh89 wrote: ↑ What do you mean by only a brokerage?
Wood Gundy clients get access to some of the most well known investment advisors in the industry. They also get their own version of private banking with the Wood Gundy AAA account. Wood Gundy also has two types of advisors available... Traditional fee-based investment advisor, as well as advisors that act as fiduciaries.
Earlier you were saying Woody Gundy has private banking, but they don't. WG cannot issue mortgage, cannot do many things a bank can, let along private banking.superfresh89 wrote: ↑ I've met lots of people with CIBC Private Banking...
I think CIBC Private Banking is another tier up entirely... not the same as Wood Gundy. Minimum 5MM or 10MM invested.
Who told you about WG? I was under the total opposite impression of WG - of the Big 5, I'd be most confident using a WG advisor. I find RBC/TD/BMO advisors are sleezy and Scotia is just too small and inconvenient. You could be right about them not doing as well as the others though.
Either way... Back on topic.. regardless of which institution... It still boils down the the same crap. I would never invest with any of the big banks offerings, private banking or not. For sure no bank is getting my money just so I can buy their mutual funds.
Did you ask what their annual fee and custodial fee is?Cavegirl wrote: ↑ Had asked TD. Their private pooled funds are only accessible to clients investing with their private investment counsels.
They used to required at least $1M in the portfolio, but this year lowered it to $750k. The MER in those pooled funds are about 0.02%.
They don't have links to show those private series pooled funds.
Again, WG does NOT have private banking nor can they arrange mortgages. To get mortgage you go to CIBC, not WG.superfresh89 wrote: ↑ CIBC has many divisions and departments... Imperial Service is for clients with approx $100K+ to invest - they only sell pooled funds and 3rd party mutual funds. Then there's WG, a full service brokerage with fee-based and fiduciary advisors - 500K-1MM+ would be their target audience. There IS CIBC Private Banking... It's for clients with $5-10MM+. Even if WG doesn't do mortgages, they can easily arrange for a mortgage for you thru their Private Banking or branch channels.
I never said I don't trust any of the banks. I said I wouldn't waste my money paying fees to any of them. I did say WG has the last sleazy sales people out of the ones I've dealt with.
Yes. TD Private Investment Advisors on the brokerage side charge a little lower, a % of your holding, and they don't have access to pooled funds.
Again, CIBC and WG are the same company. If you need a mortgage, and you only have a Wood Gundy advsior, they can set up a meeting with a mortgage advisor for you. They can also assist with more complicated manuvers such as holding your own mortgage in your RRSP.
So you just confirmed that Wood Gundy CANNOT set up a mortgage for you. They have to refer you to CIBC to do mortgage. WG is a brokerage, not a bank, they are smaller, not doing too well, and is cutting. But at least you trust them more than others, even though you still consider them sleazy.superfresh89 wrote: ↑ Again, CIBC and WG are the same company. If you need a mortgage, and you only have a Wood Gundy advsior, they can set up a meeting with a mortgage advisor for you. They can also assist with more complicated manuvers such as holding your own mortgage in your RRSP.
There is currently 1 user viewing this thread. (0 members and 1 guest)
